Comments on Alfred Hitchcock Geek: Defending Gus Van Sant's Psycho

Hello "Idawson" and thanks for your comm...

2010-08-29T12:40:46.228-07:00

Hello "Idawson" and thanks for your comment. I apologize for the delay in getting it up here. Somehow it fell through the cracks, but I'm glad to have found it and your thoughtful response to a thorny question.

I am glad found this post on an internet search th...

2010-08-21T11:51:08.260-07:00

I am glad found this post on an internet search this afternoon.

I like that you took what some may consider a non-traditional stance to the general opinion that is held of the remake.

I for one, have not seen the remake to be quite honest. So I cannot comment on the film per se. My only frame of reference is Hitchcock piece.

Upon first seeing the trailer and promotion for Psycho '98, what gave me pause was the casting of Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates. I just do not physically see him as a retreating, cowering individual they way I saw Anthony Perkins.

Also the B&W cinematographic aesthetic of the original just appeals to me more for some reason. Seeing it is color I felt like threw things off. That is one of the reasons I had to walk away from Psycho 2 (among others).

In general I have no problems with remakes, especially if they add elements to the story which make it stronger. The problem here is that this film is iconic on so many levels and its connection to the "Master of Suspense" makes it untouchable to many. It does appear that GVS's efforts were sincere so I cannot criticize him on that account.

All this being said, I think that when I come across the Psycho '98, I may give it a looksee.

Hey Jenny - Interesting thoughts re casting. I thi...

2010-08-18T11:58:05.374-07:00

Hey Jenny - Interesting thoughts re casting. I think the audience wouldn't have been surprised, no matter what GVS did - unless he totally reworked the storyline. You're absolutely right about Heche. Flinty. For squirts and giggles, you should rent the movie, just to hear what she says on the commentary track. Priceless.

I'm thinking more about the casting. I mean m...

2010-08-18T09:08:22.746-07:00

I'm thinking more about the casting. I mean maybe there was reason for it. If the actor were too much like Tony Perkins, there would be no surprise for the audience. The thing that so shocked people in the 60s was that Tony Perkins was the kind of actor that Vaughn was at the time he did the remake: affable, handsome, non-threatening. Perkins never did anything remotely like Psycho before. People thought of Vaughn as the guy from Swingers or those Rom coms.

And of course there's a huge risk, isn't there. If you play Norman Bates too well, you wind up locking yourself out of romantic leads, etc. forever, like Perkins. Even his past work was tainted by Psycho.

Heche isn't a girlish blonde. I think she's a flinty blonde. She is tough, lean, angular. Yeah, she's not like Janet Leigh who was more voluptuous but she's the modern equivalent of Hitch's cool blonde.

i love Gus Van Sant. I'm thinking of doing a rewatch of My Own Private idaho which I haven't seen in years. I've been on sort of a Shakespeare kick lately...

That is, in the original, Hitch WAS the man in the...

2010-08-17T17:38:00.675-07:00

That is, in the original, Hitch WAS the man in the cowboy hat; in the remake, Van Sant is being scolded by Hitch's double. Tells you a lot about Gus's humor going into the project.

Hi Robert - Yep, his cameo appeared in the same pl...

2010-08-17T17:36:52.128-07:00

Hi Robert - Yep, his cameo appeared in the same place as Hitch's in the original - As the man in talking to the man in the cowboy hat, outside the real estate office.

Hi Sarah - Yeah, it just goes to show how casting ...

2010-08-17T17:33:21.982-07:00

Hi Sarah - Yeah, it just goes to show how casting is so integral to the making of a movie. I can see a new book: "Cattle Call: Casting Agents and the Hollywood Dream" or some such thing.

I'm so glad someone else liked the Psycho rema...

2010-08-17T16:53:51.524-07:00

I'm so glad someone else liked the Psycho remake! I was always afraid to admit it though; your "sacred cow" comparison was totally perfect. I also liked that the shower scene, while still staying somewhat the same, was still different. I think the stab wounds (in the remake) made it a little more realistic and enhanced the scariness for newer audiences.

I still don't like Vince Vaughn though. He's always been a litle meh for me

Remaking classic films will always be problematic ...

2010-08-17T12:46:25.771-07:00

Remaking classic films will always be problematic because of the obvious comparisons. Remakes of lesser known films (or foreign films) seem to work better (I am thinking of 'The Ring' and 'The Departed').

I will give Van Sant credit for doing a shot-by-shot remake instead of a 're-imagining' cinematic pastiche.

Did Van Sant do the directors cameo as well?

I will keep my eye out!

2010-08-17T12:35:49.777-07:00

I will keep my eye out!

Hi Bill - Thanks for your thoughts. You know, I...

2010-08-17T12:33:38.289-07:00

Hi Bill - Thanks for your thoughts. You know, I'm glad to see another film lover who doesn't go in for worshiping "sacred cows"!

My AHG Facebook poll tomorrow is going to be: What's so wrong about remaking classic movies? I hope you'll weigh in!

My issue with Van Sant's Psycho remake was tha...

2010-08-17T12:20:08.759-07:00

My issue with Van Sant's Psycho remake was that I saw no point. To the extent filmmakers feel compelled to remake movies, at the very least I'd hope they were attempting to bring something new to the table. A faithful, shot-by-shot remake of Psycho—as close to perfect a film as you're likely to find—might be an interesting 3rd year film school project, but otherwise, why bother?

Van Sant already knew how to make movies, and damn fine ones. So what was he doing, exactly? Performing an experiment for his own edification? Nothing wrong with that, I suppose, but it was an expensive conceit. Furthermore, it dulled his luster, since in the end what did he create? A sub-standard copy—like a Xerox of the Mona Lisa—poorly cast and poorly performed and which offered virtually nothing fresh to the audience. As far as it goes, the only actual risk he took (aside from the financial one, perhaps) was in choosing to cast two actors who weren't up to the roles. Egg on his face!

All that said, this was never something I got too lathered about. I've never been one to worship sacred cows. To the extent I ever objected to Van Sant's Psycho, it was only to wonder what else he might have done with the time he spent making this indifferent and unnecessary film.

Yeah, there's no way the sequels could measure...

2010-08-17T11:11:53.848-07:00

Yeah, there's no way the sequels could measure up, without Hitch at the wheel. They were fun exercises, and Anthony Perkins' involvement made the whole enterprise legitimate. Perkins owned the role of Norman and nobody, IMHO, can play the role after him, so his part in the movies struck me as very real, even if at times the dialogue he was fed was a bit weak.

Anne Heche as Norman Bates. I love it. Yeah, I l...

2010-08-17T08:50:17.610-07:00

Anne Heche as Norman Bates. I love it. Yeah, I love Vince Vaughn, but he was all wrong, if what you were going for was faithfulness to the original.

What do you think of the Pyscho Sequels? I only saw the first one and it was pretty scary, but in a conventional horror movie way. I guess since Pyscho invented the convention, it's alright, then?